"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> wrote
Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> wrote
It doesn't make sense to have download counters at all, really, if they randomly drop to zero every now and then.
Frustrating though it is (I had to drop typeof download counter in the
from 99 to zero, because I had to re-upload the file initialy uploaded by Peder), I think it's a very useful tool, even though imperfect,
past providing a
good indication of amount of interest combined with author(s) activity. FWIW, if not download counter, there would be no BOOST_TYPEOF now.
You misunderstand. My comment was not out of frustration. It's a matter-of-fact observation that if the download counters randomly and periodically drop to zero, then the numbers have NO meaning. They didn't go to zero because someone set them to zero, or because someone deleted and/or re-uploaded a file. They just mysteriously went to zero. Knowing this can happen, what can you infer about a file by looking at its download counter?
I did understand. What I was trying to say is that the error needs to be corrected at some point, but meanwhile, even as is, the counter provides useful information _for library authors_. I used it to determine interest in typeof, which was otherwise undetectable. I can also see some interest in RTL, and this also is pretty much the only indicator of this interest. Even if tomorrow the download counter for RTL drops, I can still monitor the reaction to any particular change, and this is quite useful, IMO. Regards, Arkadiy